This board has to be the biggest waste of time that exists on the internet. What bothers me most of all about that board, is people playing into the drool fest over Boise St (Bronco fans, please, don't add fuel to the fire). It seems that Fresno St fans have quit posting their in an attempt to add fuel to the fire. Even if you have something valuable to add to their discussion, please don't add anything. They feed off of those things and twist them in a way that benefits their sesspool of drool. I know it's fun to have fans outside of this conference gloat about the school that you love. Or it may be tempting to defend your school's credibility or make a correction to misinformation. But the end result is an insult to the rest of the WAC and its fans and even if you think your school eventually should join the MWC, it's disrespectfull to the rest of us to feed the sesspool of drool.

As far as Boise St goes, you deserve the envy. You've accomplished much. If you want my opinion, I think your school should achieve everything it can. BUT you have to remember that your conference mates love their school and are fans of their school because they believe that their school has great value also. Please, respect the rest of us. I definitely respect Boise St and its fans, so please do the same for the rest of us. I'm using Boise St fans as an example because they seem to be the most popular source of envy among MWC fans, but I'm referring to everyone on this board. Seriously, if nothing else, you're wasting your time with the great majority of that board's posters. There are a couple that come over here to post and they're definitely welcome here (namssa and billings). The flame wars got to the point, where I decided I was wasting my time over there. I probably should've made that choice much sooner. In the beginning, when I began posting there, the flame wars were not as bad and it seemed like a decent place for discussion.

Now, as for this board, I wish we could get more participation on this board. If you have something intelligent to post, or a question, please do! I try to come up with as much as I can, but I don't have all of the ideas. I love to discuss the issues with the WAC and its fans. But many go to the MWC board, because there isn't much traffic on this board or anywhere else. It's truely sad that fans should have to go there for entertaining discussion. I don't think this is the greatest board with regard to format, but what other board do we have that is on neutral grounds? This is it, so bring it!

Now, Anthony, I know you'll come in and invite everyone to your board. Trust me, we are well aware that your board is in existence and we can find it without your help. So, no offense, but please spare us the posts that are full of pub for your board. Gawd, I miss the ol' owl board!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

who else posts there besides you and yoda? are you trying to start a boycott of their board because they don't agree with you? i really don't think they are going to miss WAC fans posting on their boards...

Well, I still post there occasionally mainly because 1) that board gets a lot more traffic these days than any other board that I read and 2) it's so much fun to piss off the MWC homers when I point out to them that their conference isn't as great as they think it is. (I love the way that Wyoming fans are always the first ones to attack my posts and mock USU/WAC/CUSA fans. Yeah, Wyoming has a lot to brag about these days.) Yeah, it's probably a total waste of time. But to a certain degree, isn't posting on message boards a waste of time under any circumstances? :)

StanfordAggie Wrote:Well, I still post there occasionally mainly because 1) that board gets a lot more traffic these days than any other board that I read and 2) it's so much fun to piss off the MWC homers when I point out to them that their conference isn't as great as they think it is. (I love the way that Wyoming fans are always the first ones to attack my posts and mock USU/WAC/CUSA fans. Yeah, Wyoming has a lot to brag about these days.) Yeah, it's probably a total waste of time. But to a certain degree, isn't posting on message boards a waste of time under any circumstances? :)

Your posts are often right on the money, StanfordAggie, but the problem is that when you "piss them off" they usually follow your posts with ridiculous attacks and derogatory comments towards Utah St. and towards the WAC. Not that anyone should care what they think of Utah St and the WAC, whether what they say is skewed or not. But the fact is, is that other posters read those comments and get a perception of WAC fans and the WAC itself. I don't like the perception I get of the WAC when I read their posts, but there is nothing we can do about their skewed opinions and trying to "piss them off" only fuels the fire, IMO. Besides, I'd rather have you posting your great stuff on this board. We could get some good discussion going on your posts.

In response to AggieSports, yes I used to post there. I've quit. Can you forgive me for posting there, please?

You guys are a hoot on this board!

ejmpalle Wrote:Your posts are often right on the money, StanfordAggie, but the problem is that when you "piss them off" they usually follow your posts with ridiculous attacks and derogatory comments towards Utah St. and towards the WAC.

Won't they do that anyways?

ejmpalle Wrote:

StanfordAggie Wrote:Well, I still post there occasionally mainly because 1) that board gets a lot more traffic these days than any other board that I read and 2) it's so much fun to piss off the MWC homers when I point out to them that their conference isn't as great as they think it is. (I love the way that Wyoming fans are always the first ones to attack my posts and mock USU/WAC/CUSA fans. Yeah, Wyoming has a lot to brag about these days.) Yeah, it's probably a total waste of time. But to a certain degree, isn't posting on message boards a waste of time under any circumstances? :)

Your posts are often right on the money, StanfordAggie, but the problem is that when you "piss them off" they usually follow your posts with ridiculous attacks and derogatory comments towards Utah St. and towards the WAC. Not that anyone should care what they think of Utah St and the WAC, whether what they say is skewed or not. But the fact is, is that other posters read those comments and get a perception of WAC fans and the WAC itself. I don't like the perception I get of the WAC when I read their posts, but there is nothing we can do about their skewed opinions and trying to "piss them off" only fuels the fire, IMO. Besides, I'd rather have you posting your great stuff on this board. We could get some good discussion going on your posts.

In response to AggieSports, yes I used to post there. I've quit. Can you forgive me for posting there, please?

you're not looking for my forgiveness...but thanks for the response. i just thought it was interesting that this was your suggestion when you are the one that has posted there 50X's more than any of the rest of us. that's all....nothing more....just thought it was interesting. no need for apologies....

is that the WAC has a lot more potential than the MWC. They are stagnant and can only improve if they swipe teams from other conferences. The WAC has a lot of upside and is only improving. The WAC is MWC biggest competitor....we are in the same timezones, compete for alot of the same TV markets etc. Given the improvements made by the WAC schools (improving facilities, coaches etc), affliated with a TV network people have heard of, and the fact that we are a better BBall conference (Nevada, USU, NMSU, Fresno etc)...the WAC is in prime position to challenge them. Again, the only way they can get over the hump against the BE is to take from the WAC. The WAC will prevail.

wolfin1 Wrote:is that the WAC has a lot more potential than the MWC. They are stagnant and can only improve if they swipe teams from other conferences. The WAC has a lot of upside and is only improving.

I'm baffled how you derive your conclusion, just that it's something I've seen posted quite often, which is essentially this:

The WAC will inevitably get better while the MWC will inevitably get worse.

I'm not sure what facts people use to arrive at that conclusion, though you may very well be right. However, it's possible that any of the following three scenarios will also come to pass:

1. The WAC and the MWC will both get better.

2. The WAC and the MWC will both get worse.

3. The MWC will get better, and the WAC will get worse.

IOW, based on sheer mathematics alone, there's only a 25% chance of the original premise occurring. If so, the WAC will supplant the MWC as the best non-BcS conference. OTOH, that also means that there's a 75% chance that the WAC will, at best, keep pace with the MWC, with the separation remaining the same.

In saying that, I see this as a win-win situation. For me, the biggest competition is the BcS, not the WAC, CUSA, MAC or SBC. Rising tides lift all ships so anytime a non-BcS school beats a BcS opponent, we all benefit.

As for stagnation, here again, I fail to see why that's inevitable. No school, to my knowledge, goes into a season with the goal of getting worse or just maintaining the status quo. We all expect our schools to improve and believe that the coaches and administrators are working to that end. So why the inevitability?

If I may briefly cite my alma mater, the 2002-04 period was not exactly one in which BYU covered itself in glory. It was, frankly, sheer misery. Howver, I've seen nothing to indicate that it's terminal. Fact of the matter is, when I see what Bronco Mendenhall, Tom Holmoe and the rest of the higher ups are doing to right the ship, I'm salivating over the long term prospects (the short term may require another year or two before things all come to fruition, something I'm willing to patiently await).

Is that sort of commitment different that that of any other MWC or WAC school?

So again, I'm not sure where this WAC-inevitably-up/MWC-inevitably-down perspective derives its conclusions, in terms of supporting facts. If they're out there, I'd love to see them.

SPCoug Wrote:[quote="wolfin1"]So again, I'm not sure where this WAC-inevitably-up/MWC-inevitably-down perspective derives its conclusions, in terms of supporting facts. If they're out there, I'd love to see them.

Well, SP, in the WAC (most of us anyway) don't see the CSTV deal being an inevitable success. In fact, we view it as a very risky venture with likely failure. The reason why is that the availability and popularity of CSTV is almost zilch. Yes, the MWC was intelligent to sign a lucrative tv deal and they'll be able to spend that money and make improvements, but the long term consequences of no publicity over recognized networks could be very detrimental.

Meanwhile, the WAC has reduced travel costs by replacing the Texans and Tulsa with Idaho, NMSU and Utah St. They've reduced their conference membership with less mouths to feed. You see, the WAC has become more efficient, financially. This is on top of agreeing to a new bowl (which ESPN owns and the WAC and ESPN are working hand in hand to make each other better). Also, in the first year of its current membership the WAC has improved in basketball, while staying about the same in football. We expect football to improve since the WAC was so young as a conference last year. We also expect the WAC recruiting to help the "newbies" improve. Nevada is a basketball program that is quickly on the rise. Over my 7 year average Sagarin rankings, they were barely in the top 150. In the last three years they've been in the top 30! That is higher than any MWC team. Boise St can say similar things in football, but over a much larger time span. The WAC has the leaders, in other words, to take us to new heights. Again, we don't expect our worst teams in each sport to get any worse, but better. And it's clearly obvious that the top teams in BB and FB are more quickly on the rise than any MWC team.

The MWC improved its football status by adding TCU, but it got worse by adding TCU in basketball. Also, the MWC's powerhouse, Utah, got worse by losing Urban Myer and Rick Majerus. For many years (and to a large degree they still do) Utah has carried the MWC. They may still do that, but they've struggled to achieve that status once again under Whittingham and Giacoletti.

I'm not trying to get in a pissing contest, after all, you are a very respectfull poster. But I'd like to show you, since you are one of the few MWC posters with a good head on your shoulders, that the WAC is doing just fine and in many ways our stock is rising quicker than the MWC. Granted the MWC has better facilities and attendance, but winning in the WAC can cure a lot of evils and so can a legitimate tv deal.

Since this is a dead period for College Sports, you will have to wait until the end of July or the start of August for more traffic.
I post on the MWC board because I have interest in 4 of the northern MWC teams, particularly Wyoming and BSU plays two of those this Fall. Reading and posting there fills the time until Football season. I personally prefer the WAC over the MWC.

SPCoug Wrote:

wolfin1 Wrote:is that the WAC has a lot more potential than the MWC. They are stagnant and can only improve if they swipe teams from other conferences. The WAC has a lot of upside and is only improving.

I'm baffled how you derive your conclusion, just that it's something I've seen posted quite often, which is essentially this:

The WAC will inevitably get better while the MWC will inevitably get worse.

I'm not sure what facts people use to arrive at that conclusion, though you may very well be right. However, it's possible that any of the following three scenarios will also come to pass:

1. The WAC and the MWC will both get better.

2. The WAC and the MWC will both get worse.

3. The MWC will get better, and the WAC will get worse.

IOW, based on sheer mathematics alone, there's only a 25% chance of the original premise occurring. If so, the WAC will supplant the MWC as the best non-BcS conference. OTOH, that also means that there's a 75% chance that the WAC will, at best, keep pace with the MWC, with the separation remaining the same.

In saying that, I see this as a win-win situation. For me, the biggest competition is the BcS, not the WAC, CUSA, MAC or SBC. Rising tides lift all ships so anytime a non-BcS school beats a BcS opponent, we all benefit.

As for stagnation, here again, I fail to see why that's inevitable. No school, to my knowledge, goes into a season with the goal of getting worse or just maintaining the status quo. We all expect our schools to improve and believe that the coaches and administrators are working to that end. So why the inevitability?

If I may briefly cite my alma mater, the 2002-04 period was not exactly one in which BYU covered itself in glory. It was, frankly, sheer misery. Howver, I've seen nothing to indicate that it's terminal. Fact of the matter is, when I see what Bronco Mendenhall, Tom Holmoe and the rest of the higher ups are doing to right the ship, I'm salivating over the long term prospects (the short term may require another year or two before things all come to fruition, something I'm willing to patiently await).

Is that sort of commitment different that that of any other MWC or WAC school?

So again, I'm not sure where this WAC-inevitably-up/MWC-inevitably-down perspective derives its conclusions, in terms of supporting facts. If they're out there, I'd love to see them.

According to some of your MWC fan's evaluation of the WAC, we have a lot more room to move up than you do and that support the conclusion that the WAC is more likely to get better than the MWC.

wolfin1 Wrote:is that the WAC has a lot more potential than the MWC. They are stagnant and can only improve if they swipe teams from other conferences. The WAC has a lot of upside and is only improving. The WAC is MWC biggest competitor....we are in the same timezones, compete for alot of the same TV markets etc. Given the improvements made by the WAC schools (improving facilities, coaches etc), affliated with a TV network people have heard of, and the fact that we are a better BBall conference (Nevada, USU, NMSU, Fresno etc)...the WAC is in prime position to challenge them. Again, the only way they can get over the hump against the BE is to take from the WAC. The WAC will prevail.

We don't always agree Wolfin1, but we do on this. The MWC can lay claim to the past success of Utah, but if they had not brought in TCU for football they wouldn't have had much shine last season. Of course on the MWC board, my comments would probably close to treason. Bottom line as some have posted here before, who really gives a rats a$$ what posters think on a MWC message board? It might be fun to read, but to take anything they post serious about expansion or the WAC is usually comical.

ejmpalle Wrote:

StanfordAggie Wrote:Well, I still post there occasionally mainly because 1) that board gets a lot more traffic these days than any other board that I read and 2) it's so much fun to piss off the MWC homers when I point out to them that their conference isn't as great as they think it is. (I love the way that Wyoming fans are always the first ones to attack my posts and mock USU/WAC/CUSA fans. Yeah, Wyoming has a lot to brag about these days.) Yeah, it's probably a total waste of time. But to a certain degree, isn't posting on message boards a waste of time under any circumstances? :)

Your posts are often right on the money, StanfordAggie, but the problem is that when you "piss them off" they usually follow your posts with ridiculous attacks and derogatory comments towards Utah St. and towards the WAC. Not that anyone should care what they think of Utah St and the WAC, whether what they say is skewed or not. But the fact is, is that other posters read those comments and get a perception of WAC fans and the WAC itself. I don't like the perception I get of the WAC when I read their posts, but there is nothing we can do about their skewed opinions and trying to "piss them off" only fuels the fire, IMO. Besides, I'd rather have you posting your great stuff on this board. We could get some good discussion going on your posts.

In response to AggieSports, yes I used to post there. I've quit. Can you forgive me for posting there, please?

I have to admit that I'm kind of coming to the same conclusion. As much as it is to annoy the people on that board who believe that the MWC is God's gift to college football, the constant pissing contests are starting to get old. I don't know that I'll stop posting there entirely, but I'm probably cutting back at this point.

The better question, in my mind, is why doesn't this board get more traffic? If it were up to me, I would only post on this board and the USU board and never look at the MWC board again. However, this board gets so little traffic that I can usually read a day's worth of posts in 5-10 minutes. If we had more posters and more discussions on this board, I would spend a lot more time on this board. However, as it is now, the MWC board is much more active than any other board I visit.

Any thought on how we can get more traffic on this board? I'm told that the old WAC board used to get tons of traffic (and that Karl Benson himself used to post there occasionally). Is the problem that there are three competing WAC boards at the moment? (Or at least two, the last I checked Yoda's board was more or less dead...)

StanfordAggie Wrote:I have to admit that I'm kind of coming to the same conclusion. As much as it is to annoy the people on that board who believe that the MWC is God's gift to college football, the constant pissing contests are starting to get old. I don't know that I'll stop posting there entirely, but I'm probably cutting back at this point.

The better question, in my mind, is why doesn't this board get more traffic? If it were up to me, I would only post on this board and the USU board and never look at the MWC board again. However, this board gets so little traffic that I can usually read a day's worth of posts in 5-10 minutes. If we had more posters and more discussions on this board, I would spend a lot more time on this board. However, as it is now, the MWC board is much more active than any other board I visit.

Any thought on how we can get more traffic on this board? I'm told that the old WAC board used to get tons of traffic (and that Karl Benson himself used to post there occasionally). Is the problem that there are three competing WAC boards at the moment? (Or at least two, the last I checked Yoda's board was more or less dead...)

I think that the reason this board doesn't get more traffic is because it's not publisized as much as it should be, quite honestly. Also, the discussion has to begin somewhere (people aren't going to flock over here for nothing). It might as well be us to get it going.

SPCoug Wrote:

wolfin1 Wrote:is that the WAC has a lot more potential than the MWC. They are stagnant and can only improve if they swipe teams from other conferences. The WAC has a lot of upside and is only improving.

I'm baffled how you derive your conclusion, just that it's something I've seen posted quite often, which is essentially this:

The WAC will inevitably get better while the MWC will inevitably get worse.

I'm not sure what facts people use to arrive at that conclusion, though you may very well be right. However, it's possible that any of the following three scenarios will also come to pass:

1. The WAC and the MWC will both get better.

2. The WAC and the MWC will both get worse.

3. The MWC will get better, and the WAC will get worse.

IOW, based on sheer mathematics alone, there's only a 25% chance of the original premise occurring. If so, the WAC will supplant the MWC as the best non-BcS conference. OTOH, that also means that there's a 75% chance that the WAC will, at best, keep pace with the MWC, with the separation remaining the same.

In saying that, I see this as a win-win situation. For me, the biggest competition is the BcS, not the WAC, CUSA, MAC or SBC. Rising tides lift all ships so anytime a non-BcS school beats a BcS opponent, we all benefit.

As for stagnation, here again, I fail to see why that's inevitable. No school, to my knowledge, goes into a season with the goal of getting worse or just maintaining the status quo. We all expect our schools to improve and believe that the coaches and administrators are working to that end. So why the inevitability?

If I may briefly cite my alma mater, the 2002-04 period was not exactly one in which BYU covered itself in glory. It was, frankly, sheer misery. Howver, I've seen nothing to indicate that it's terminal. Fact of the matter is, when I see what Bronco Mendenhall, Tom Holmoe and the rest of the higher ups are doing to right the ship, I'm salivating over the long term prospects (the short term may require another year or two before things all come to fruition, something I'm willing to patiently await).

Is that sort of commitment different that that of any other MWC or WAC school?

So again, I'm not sure where this WAC-inevitably-up/MWC-inevitably-down perspective derives its conclusions, in terms of supporting facts. If they're out there, I'd love to see them.

Well, I do tend to think that the current WAC has more potential "upside" than the MWC, but I don't know that that's something to brag about. The bottom line is that USU, SJSU, NMSU, and Idaho can't get much worse, so the only direction they can possibly go is up.

I am fairly excited about the future of WAC basketball, however. Last year NMSU did surprisingly well even though many of their best players weren't playing. Now that all of their transfers are eligible and they've picked up several other highly touted recruits, they should be very good next year. And Steve Cleveland's track record at BYU is excellent, so I'm optimistic that he can make Fresno into a contender. And even Idaho seems to be committed to turning around their program, even if they don't compete for a WAC title immediately. It looks like the WAC could very easily have 4-5 schools competing for NCAA bids in the upcoming years.

Personally, I don't see as much upside potential for the MWC, especially in basketball. I sort of get the impression that the MWC collectively is kind of focused on football and trying to earn a BCS autobid and that basketball is sort of an afterthought. And given that I'm very skeptical that the BCS is going to be handing out more autobids any time soon and the fact that NCAA basketball tournament shares are worth more to a conference than a non-BCS bowl, I think you could make a strong case for the WAC being a more desirable home going forward, especially for a "basketball school" like Utah State. Even in football (at least from reading the MWC board), the mindset seems to be "we'll become a better football conference by inviting Fresno State and Boise State" rather than "we'll become a better football conference when CSU, Air Force, and Wyoming start winning more games."

However, this is just my subjective opinion, and I'm probably being a WAC homer here. At any rate, I definitely agree that the constant smack talk and mutual criticism of the two conferences is stupid (even though I've been guilty of it from time to time). I would much prefer to view the BCS as "the enemy" rather than the MWC...

StanfordAggie Wrote:I'm told that the old WAC board used to get tons of traffic (and that Karl Benson himself used to post there occasionally).

LOL. People do have a way of guilding "the good old days." The old WAC board was more active than this, but not by as much as some seem to remember...certainly nowhere near the MWC board. Part of the reason was you didn't need to register...just type a message and attach any moniker that grabbed your fancy (although your IP address was displayed, which led to occassional attempts to connect various posts). In reality, it was a mess, albeit often an entertaining mess. UTEP trolls were responsible for a significant percentage of the traffic...one in particular that I bet most people remember.

Another reason why the board has slowed a little is because it's not football or basketball season. Everybody in the WAC plays these two sports...but only 5 WAC teams play baseball (...not counting Sac State).

jediwarrior Wrote:Another reason why the board has slowed a little is because it's not football or basketball season. Everybody in the WAC plays these two sports...but only 5 WAC teams play baseball (...not counting Sac State).

That's true but I'd also add that I think people are afraid (because of the potential flames that can occur) to speculate about the future and search for ways that the conference as a whole may improve. Let me elaborate...

Reflecting on the past is difficult in this conference because we're coming from so many different directions (fortunately we all have the same goal right now and that is the success of the WAC). Utah St, Idaho and NMSU are coming from the Sun Belt, which to a large degree no other team in the WAC can relate to. When our schools talk about how the Sun Belt brought our schools down, it seems like some WAC fans laugh, because they think that being in the Sun Belt equals an automatic conference championship. But they tend to forget how all of the other factors add up and bite you. Utah St and Idaho are coming from the Big West in basketball. For Idaho, the Big West wasn't helpfull, because the fans in the northwest couldn't care less about the schools in Southern California, except for USC and UCLA. Utah St all ready had a 30 year history with those California teams.

With Boise St you have a team that has been in D1A for a fairly short time. I'm not sure that Boise St fans have a clear picture of what happens over 50 years of football such as Fresno St, Utah St, SJSU and NMSU. They're thinking that it's great to be competing on such a high level at D1A, but I'm not sure that there is a clear understanding (like the schools I mentioned) that it could all fall apart with one coaching change or change in school president, athletic director, conference change, etc. No offense, Bronco fans, I see you're program heading down the same road it's been on in D1A and even improving, but it could all fall apart with any major change at any point. Don't take it for granted and try to grasp how difficult it is to get it back, especially when you have numerous factors working against you. And understand with the right pieces in place, other schools that have been dead for some time like certain schools in the WAC can reemerge.

Fresno St is coming from a direction where they felt like a integral part of what was percieved as a stable conference, then the group (they all ready had a track record for leaving teams behind for their own personal gain) called the MWC left to form their own league. And so Fresno St sat behind, wondering "what now"? We have to travel all over the place in this new WAC. We don't have the divisional configuration we had before. To their credit, they took it well and maintained their success rate and support. I think at some point the new WAC grew on them and then the next tidle wave came along with Tulsa, SMU, Rice and UTEP leaving for C-USA. I'm sure they were thinking that the WAC was not a conference they could trust any longer at this point (I'm sure Hawaii fans were riding right along these same thoughts). They began to look for a way out (thus you remember Steve Cleveland's comments about wanting to get in the MWC). Who could blame them?

I'm sure that La Tech is just hanging on for dear life at this point. C-USA isn't calling right now. And the teams that were more regional to them left. The Sun Belt is surely not an option.

So you have multiple groups (I'm sure you can group fans similarly.):
Group #1 Schools that want to be here and trust the WAC's future.
Utah St, NMSU and Idaho
We've been through the worst of times and realize that the WAC couldn't be any worse than those bad times. In fact, I believe that the "newbies" think that since they've made it through those hard times, they're more capable than any other school of making a regional conference successfull.
Group #2 Schools that don't trust the WAC's stability.
SJSU, Fresno St, Hawaii
Group #3 A school that thinks they've conquered all up to this point. Why not reach higher?
Boise St
Group #4 We're just hanging on.
La Tech
Group #5 Where else are we going to go? We're too good for the likes of UNLV's conference.
Nevada

There's a quite a bit of TIC in here, but I'm trying to illustrate the point of coming from different directions and heading to a common goal. There's not a single school in the WAC that doesn't want the WAC to be the most successfull mid-major conferece in the nation. But I think there are some that don't believe that the WAC will take them to the level they wish to arrive at. There is a lack of trust because of an underlying feeling based on the WAC's track record. There is also a lack of trust because of the perception that if the "newbies" came from the Sun Belt Conference, then they must not be able to take us to the level we wish to arrive at.

We need to get over our differences, deriving from our different paths, and create a WAC that meets our expectations. I don't believe that there is one Idaho fan, Utah St fan, or NMSU fan that doesn't believe this is possible. Correct me if I'm wrong. But the problem I see among WAC fans is that they underestimate the potential of the WAC's new members and the relationship between their school and the rest of the conference. We essentially need more WAC homers such as myself, IMO ;-). I think they also overestimate the potential of other schools, elsewhere, with recognizable names and reputation. Many of the concerns I see are justified. But I also think those concerns are because of a lack of understanding of the overall potential of their own school and the WAC as a whole.

I think there needs to be a certain amount of, dare I say it, faith that the "newbies" will improve in the WAC and give a boost to the teams that have all ready been doing well (I believe we've all ready seen this in basketball with the relationship between Nevada and Utah St.). I think there also needs to be some faith that the new configuration and regionality of the conference will regenerate teams like SJSU. I also think there needs to be a greater sense of loyalty among conference mates. I know many times that loyalty is brougt by respect and respect is brought by success. But I think this is a case where investing a penny of loyalty in the WAC now can turn into a gold mine in the future. And not investing loyalty could end up hurting your program more than helping.

So, in essence, I think we need more homers. More people that are excited about being in the WAC and their school being in the WAC. I think we're still seeing fans that are discontent with the WAC because of factors I mentioned above. I think those same fans envy the relationship among schools that other conferences have. It's a shame from my perspective, because I think the WAC has more potential than any mid-major.

It's also a shame that controversy on other boards breeds company. I'm tired of controversy without limits and without evidence. That is why I wish we could get more participation among WAC fans on this board. But I realize that it's going to take time for everyone to come around and realize what a jewel the WAC is.

jediwarrior Wrote:...only 5 WAC teams play baseball (...not counting Sac State).

Hey! I know Nevada's been struggling, but that statement's a little harsh, don't you think?

;-)